causes of the american revolutionary war essay

The Root Causes of the American Revolution

The cause of the american revolution.

• America's Independent Way of Thinking

The Freedoms and Restrictions of Location

The control of government, the economic troubles, the corruption and control, the criminal justice system, grievances that led to revolution and the constitution.

• M.A., History, University of Florida
• B.A., History, University of Florida

The American Revolution began in 1775 as an open conflict between the United Thirteen Colonies  and Great Britain. Many factors played a role in the colonists' desires to fight for their independence. Not only did these issues lead to war , but they also shaped the foundation of the United States of America.

No single event caused the revolution. It was, instead, a series of events that led to the war . Essentially, it began as a disagreement over the way Great Britain governed the colonies and the way the colonies thought they should be treated. Americans felt they deserved all the rights of Englishmen. The British, on the other hand, thought that the colonies were created to be used in ways that best suited the Crown and Parliament. This conflict is embodied in one of the rallying cries of the ​ American Revolution : "No Taxation Without Representation."

America's Independent Way of Thinking

In order to understand what led to the rebellion, it's important to look at the mindset of the founding fathers . It should also be noted that this mindset was not that of the majority of colonists. There were no pollsters during the American revolution, but it's safe to say its popularity rose and fell over the course of the war. Historian Robert M. Calhoon estimated that only about 40–45% of the free population supported the revolution, while about 15–20% of the free white males remained loyal.     

The 18th century is known historically as the age of Enlightenment . It was a period when thinkers, philosophers, statesman, and artists began to question the politics of government, the role of the church, and other fundamental and ethical questions of society as a whole. The period was also known as the Age of Reason, and many colonists followed this new way of thinking.

A number of the revolutionary leaders had studied major writings of the Enlightenment, including those of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and the Baron de Montesquieu. From these thinkers, the founders gleaned such new political concepts as the social contract , limited government, the consent of the governed, and the  separation of powers .

Locke's writings, in particular, struck a chord. His books helped to raise questions about the rights of the governed and the overreach of the British government. They spurred the "republican" ideology that stood up in opposition to those viewed as tyrants.

Men such as Benjamin Franklin and John Adams were also influenced by the teachings of the Puritans and Presbyterians. These teachings included such new radical ideas as the principle that all men are created equal and the belief that a king has no divine rights. Together, these innovative ways of thinking led many in this era to consider it their duty to rebel against laws they viewed as unjust.

The geography of the colonies also contributed to the revolution. Their distance from Great Britain naturally created a sense of independence that was hard to overcome. Those willing to colonize the new world generally had a strong independent streak with a profound desire for new opportunities and more freedom.

The Proclamation of 1763 played its own role. After the French and Indian War , King George III issued the royal decree that prevented further colonization west of the Appalachian Mountains. The intent was to normalize relations with the Indigenous peoples, many of whom fought with the French.

A number of settlers had purchased land in the now forbidden area or had received land grants. The crown's proclamation was largely ignored as settlers moved anyway and the "Proclamation Line" eventually moved after much lobbying. Despite this concession, the affair left another stain on the relationship between the colonies and Britain.

The existence of colonial legislatures meant that the colonies were in many ways independent of the crown. The legislatures were allowed to levy taxes, muster troops, and pass laws. Over time, these powers became rights in the eyes of many colonists.

The British government had different ideas and attempted to curtail the powers of these newly elected bodies. There were numerous measures designed to ensure the colonial legislatures did not achieve autonomy, although many had nothing to do with the larger British Empire . In the minds of colonists, they were a matter of local concern.

From these small, rebellious legislative bodies that represented the colonists, the future leaders of the United States were born.

Even though the British believed in mercantilism , Prime Minister Robert Walpole espoused a view of " salutary neglect ." This system was in place from 1607 through 1763, during which the British were lax on enforcement of external trade relations. Walpole believed this enhanced freedom would stimulate commerce.

The French and Indian War led to considerable economic trouble for the British government. Its cost was significant, and the British were determined to make up for the lack of funds. They levied new taxes on the colonists and increased trade regulations. These actions were not well received by the colonists.

New taxes were enforced, including the Sugar Act and the Currency Act , both in 1764. The Sugar Act increased already considerable taxes on molasses and restricted certain export goods to Britain alone. The Currency Act prohibited the printing of money in the colonies, making businesses rely more on the crippled British economy. 

Feeling underrepresented, overtaxed, and unable to engage in free trade, the colonists rallied to the slogan, "No Taxation Without Representation." This discontent became very apparent in 1773 with the events that later became known as the Boston Tea Party .

The British government's presence became increasingly more visible in the years leading to the revolution. British officials and soldiers were given more control over the colonists and this led to widespread corruption.

Among the most glaring of these issues were the "Writs of Assistance." These were general search warrants that gave British soldiers the right to search and seize any property they deemed to be smuggled or illegal goods. Designed to assist the British in enforcing trade laws, these documents allowed British soldiers to enter, search, and seize warehouses, private homes, and ships whenever necessary. However, many abused this power.

In 1761, Boston lawyer James Otis fought for the constitutional rights of the colonists in this matter but lost. The defeat only inflamed the level of defiance and ultimately led to the Fourth Amendment in the U.S. Constitution .

The Third Amendment was also inspired by the overreach of the British government. Forcing colonists to house British soldiers in their homes infuriated the population. It was inconvenient and costly to the colonists, and many also found it a traumatic experience after events like the  Boston Massacre in 1770 .

Trade and commerce were overly controlled, the British Army made its presence known, and the local colonial government was limited by a power far across the Atlantic Ocean. If these affronts to the colonists' dignity were not enough to ignite the fires of rebellion, American colonists also had to endure a corrupt justice system.

Political protests became a regular occurrence as these realities set in. In 1769, Alexander McDougall was imprisoned for libel when his work "To the Betrayed Inhabitants of the City and Colony of New York" was published. His imprisonment and the Boston Massacre were just two infamous examples of the measures the British took to crack down on protesters. 

After six British soldiers were acquitted and two dishonorably discharged for the Boston Massacre—ironically enough, they were defended by John Adams—the British government changed the rules. From then on, officers accused of any offense in the colonies would be sent to England for trial. This meant that fewer witnesses would be on hand to give their accounts of events and it led to even fewer convictions.

To make matters even worse, jury trials were replaced with verdicts and punishments handed down directly by colonial judges. Over time, the colonial authorities lost power over this as well because the judges were known to be chosen, paid, and supervised by the British government. The right to a fair trial by a jury of their peers was no longer possible for many colonists.

All of these grievances that colonists had with the British government led to the events of the American Revolution. And many of these grievances directly affected what the founding fathers wrote into the U.S. Constitution . These constitutional rights and principles reflect the hopes of the framers that the new American government would not subject their citizens to the same loss of freedoms that the colonists had experienced under Britain's rule.

Schellhammer, Michael. " John Adams's Rule of Thirds ." Critical Thinking, Journal of the American Revolution . 11 Feb. 2013.

Calhoon, Robert M. " Loyalism and Neutrality ." A Companion to the American Revolution , edited by Jack P. Greene and J. R. Pole, Wiley, 2008, pp. 235-247, doi:10.1002/9780470756454.ch29 

• Major Events That Led to the American Revolution
• The Declaration of Independence
• The History of British Taxation in the American Colonies
• American Revolution: The Boston Massacre
• American Revolution: The Stamp Act of 1765
• American Revolution: Boston Tea Party
• The Original 13 U.S. States
• Questions Left by The Boston Massacre
• American Revolution: The Intolerable Acts
• An Introduction to the American Revolutionary War
• Biography of Samuel Adams, Revolutionary Activist and Philosopher
• What Led to the Boston Tea Party?
• Brief History of the Declaration of Independence
• Europe and the American Revolutionary War
• Patrick Henry
• Federalism and the United States Constitution

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

5.3: The Causes of the American Revolution

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 9360

• American YAWP
• Stanford via Stanford University Press

Most immediately, the American Revolution resulted directly from attempts to reform the British Empire after the Seven Years’ War. The Seven Years’ War culminated nearly a half century of war between Europe’s imperial powers. It was truly a world war, fought between multiple empires on multiple continents. At its conclusion, the British Empire had never been larger. Britain now controlled the North American continent east of the Mississippi River, including French Canada. It had also consolidated its control over India. But the realities and responsibilities of the postwar empire were daunting. War (let alone victory) on such a scale was costly. Britain doubled the national debt to 13.5 times its annual revenue. Britain faced significant new costs required to secure and defend its far-flung empire, especially the western frontiers of the North American colonies. These factors led Britain in the 1760s to attempt to consolidate control over its North American colonies, which, in turn, led to resistance.

King George III took the crown in 1760 and brought Tories into his government after three decades of Whig rule. They represented an authoritarian vision of empire in which colonies would be subordinate. The Royal Proclamation of 1763 was Britain’s first major postwar imperial action targeting North America. The king forbade settlement west of the Appalachian Mountains in an attempt to limit costly wars with Native Americans. Colonists, however, protested and demanded access to the territory for which they had fought alongside the British.

In 1764, Parliament passed two more reforms. The Sugar Act sought to combat widespread smuggling of molasses in New England by cutting the duty in half but increasing enforcement. Also, smugglers would be tried by vice-admiralty courts and not juries. Parliament also passed the Currency Act, which restricted colonies from producing paper money. Hard money, such as gold and silver coins, was scarce in the colonies. The lack of currency impeded the colonies’ increasingly sophisticated transatlantic economies, but it was especially damaging in 1764 because a postwar recession had already begun. Between the restrictions of the Proclamation of 1763, the Currency Act, and the Sugar Act’s canceling of trials-by-jury for smugglers, some colonists began to fear a pattern of increased taxation and restricted liberties.

In March 1765, Parliament passed the Stamp Act. The act required that many documents be printed on paper that had been stamped to show the duty had been paid, including newspapers, pamphlets, diplomas, legal documents, and even playing cards. The Sugar Act of 1764 was an attempt to get merchants to pay an already existing duty, but the Stamp Act created a new, direct (or “internal”) tax. Parliament had never before directly taxed the colonists. Instead, colonies contributed to the empire through the payment of indirect, “external” taxes, such as customs duties. In 1765, Daniel Dulany of Maryland wrote, “A right to impose an internal tax on the colonies, without their consent for the single purpose of revenue, is denied, a right to regulate their trade without their consent is, admitted.” 7 Also, unlike the Sugar Act, which primarily affected merchants, the Stamp Act directly affected numerous groups throughout colonial society, including printers, lawyers, college graduates, and even sailors who played cards. This led, in part, to broader, more popular resistance.

Resistance to the Stamp Act took three forms, distinguished largely by class: legislative resistance by elites, economic resistance by merchants, and popular protest by common colonists. Colonial elites responded by passing resolutions in their assemblies. The most famous of the anti-Stamp Act resolutions were the Virginia Resolves, passed by the House of Burgesses on May 30, 1765, which declared that the colonists were entitled to “all the liberties, privileges, franchises, and immunities . . . possessed by the people of Great Britain.” When the Virginia Resolves were printed throughout the colonies, however, they often included a few extra, far more radical resolutions not passed by the Virginia House of Burgesses, the last of which asserted that only “the general assembly of this colony have any right or power to impose or lay any taxation” and that anyone who argued differently “shall be deemed an enemy to this his majesty’s colony.” 8 These additional items spread throughout the colonies and helped radicalize subsequent responses in other colonial assemblies. These responses eventually led to the calling of the Stamp Act Congress in New York City in October 1765. Nine colonies sent delegates, who included Benjamin Franklin, John Dickinson, Thomas Hutchinson, Philip Livingston, and James Otis. 9

The Stamp Act Congress issued a “Declaration of Rights and Grievances,” which, like the Virginia Resolves, declared allegiance to the king and “all due subordination” to Parliament but also reasserted the idea that colonists were entitled to the same rights as Britons. Those rights included trial by jury, which had been abridged by the Sugar Act, and the right to be taxed only by their own elected representatives. As Daniel Dulany wrote in 1765, “It is an essential principle of the English constitution, that the subject shall not be taxed without his consent.” 10 Benjamin Franklin called it the “prime Maxim of all free Government.” 11 Because the colonies did not elect members to Parliament, they believed that they were not represented and could not be taxed by that body. In response, Parliament and the Crown argued that the colonists were “virtually represented,” just like the residents of those boroughs or counties in England that did not elect members to Parliament. However, the colonists rejected the notion of virtual representation, with one pamphleteer calling it a “monstrous idea.” 12

The second type of resistance to the Stamp Act was economic. While the Stamp Act Congress deliberated, merchants in major port cities were preparing nonimportation agreements, hoping that their refusal to import British goods would lead British merchants to lobby for the repeal of the Stamp Act. In New York City, “upwards of two hundred principal merchants” agreed not to import, sell, or buy “any goods, wares, or merchandises” from Great Britain. 13 In Philadelphia, merchants gathered at “a general meeting” to agree that “they would not Import any Goods from Great-Britain until the Stamp-Act was Repealed.” 14 The plan worked. By January 1766, London merchants sent a letter to Parliament arguing that they had been “reduced to the necessity of pending ruin” by the Stamp Act and the subsequent boycotts. 15

The third, and perhaps, most crucial type of resistance was popular protest. Riots broke out in Boston. Crowds burned the appointed stamp distributor for Massachusetts, Andrew Oliver, in effigy and pulled a building he owned “down to the Ground in five minutes.” 16 Oliver resigned the position the next day. The following week, a crowd also set upon the home of his brother-in-law, Lieutenant Governor Thomas Hutchinson, who had publicly argued for submission to the stamp tax. Before the evening was over, much of Hutchinson’s home and belongings had been destroyed. 17

Popular violence and intimidation spread quickly throughout the colonies. In New York City, posted notices read:

PRO PATRIA, The first Man that either distributes or makes use of Stampt Paper, let him take care of his House, Person, & Effects. Vox Populi; We dare.” 18

By November 16, all of the original twelve stamp distributors had resigned, and by 1766, groups calling themselves the Sons of Liberty were formed in most colonies to direct and organize further resistance. These tactics had the dual effect of sending a message to Parliament and discouraging colonists from accepting appointments as stamp collectors. With no one to distribute the stamps, the act became unenforceable.

Pressure on Parliament grew until, in February 1766, it repealed the Stamp Act. But to save face and to try to avoid this kind of problem in the future, Parliament also passed the Declaratory Act, asserting that Parliament had the “full power and authority to make laws . . . to bind the colonies and people of America . . . in all cases whatsoever.” However, colonists were too busy celebrating the repeal of the Stamp Act to take much notice of the Declaratory Act. In New York City, the inhabitants raised a huge lead statue of King George III in honor of the Stamp Act’s repeal. It could be argued that there was no moment at which colonists felt more proud to be members of the free British Empire than 1766. But Britain still needed revenue from the colonies. 19

The colonies had resisted the implementation of direct taxes, but the Declaratory Act reserved Parliament’s right to impose them. And, in the colonists’ dispatches to Parliament and in numerous pamphlets, they had explicitly acknowledged the right of Parliament to regulate colonial trade. So Britain’s next attempt to draw revenues from the colonies, the Townshend Acts, were passed in June 1767, creating new customs duties on common items, like lead, glass, paint, and tea, instead of direct taxes. The acts also created and strengthened formal mechanisms to enforce compliance, including a new American Board of Customs Commissioners and more vice-admiralty courts to try smugglers. Revenues from customs seizures would be used to pay customs officers and other royal officials, including the governors, thereby incentivizing them to convict offenders. These acts increased the presence of the British government in the colonies and circumscribed the authority of the colonial assemblies, since paying the governor’s salary had long given the assemblies significant power over them. Unsurprisingly, colonists, once again, resisted.

Even though these were duties, many colonial resistance authors still referred to them as “taxes,” because they were designed primarily to extract revenues from the colonies not to regulate trade. John Dickinson, in his “Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania,” wrote, “That we may legally be bound to pay any general duties on these commodities, relative to the regulation of trade, is granted; but we being obliged by her laws to take them from Great Britain, any special duties imposed on their exportation to us only, with intention to raise a revenue from us only, are as much taxes upon us, as those imposed by the Stamp Act.” Hence, many authors asked: once the colonists assented to a tax in any form , what would stop the British from imposing ever more and greater taxes on the colonists? 20

New forms of resistance emerged in which elite, middling, and working-class colonists participated together. Merchants reinstituted nonimportation agreements, and common colonists agreed not to consume these same products. Lists were circulated with signatories promising not to buy any British goods. These lists were often published in newspapers, bestowing recognition on those who had signed and led to pressure on those who had not.

Women, too, became involved to an unprecedented degree in resistance to the Townshend Acts. They circulated subscription lists and gathered signatures. The first political commentaries in newspapers written by women appeared. 21 Also, without new imports of British clothes, colonists took to wearing simple, homespun clothing. Spinning clubs were formed, in which local women would gather at one of their homes and spin cloth for homespun clothing for their families and even for the community. 22

Homespun clothing quickly became a marker of one’s virtue and patriotism, and women were an important part of this cultural shift. At the same time, British goods and luxuries previously desired now became symbols of tyranny. Nonimportation and, especially, nonconsumption agreements changed colonists’ cultural relationship with the mother country. Committees of Inspection monitored merchants and residents to make sure that no one broke the agreements. Offenders could expect to be shamed by having their names and offenses published in the newspaper and in broadsides.

Nonimportation and nonconsumption helped forge colonial unity. Colonies formed Committees of Correspondence to keep each other informed of the resistance efforts throughout the colonies. Newspapers reprinted exploits of resistance, giving colonists a sense that they were part of a broader political community. The best example of this new “continental conversation” came in the wake of the Boston Massacre. Britain sent regiments to Boston in 1768 to help enforce the new acts and quell the resistance. On the evening of March 5, 1770, a crowd gathered outside the Custom House and began hurling insults, snowballs, and perhaps more at the young sentry. When a small number of soldiers came to the sentry’s aid, the crowd grew increasingly hostile until the soldiers fired. After the smoke cleared, five Bostonians were dead, including one of the ringleaders, Crispus Attucks, a former slave turned free dockworker. The soldiers were tried in Boston and won acquittal, thanks, in part, to their defense attorney, John Adams. News of the Boston Massacre spread quickly through the new resistance communication networks, aided by a famous engraving initially circulated by Paul Revere, which depicted bloodthirsty British soldiers with grins on their faces firing into a peaceful crowd. The engraving was quickly circulated and reprinted throughout the colonies, generating sympathy for Boston and anger with Britain.

Resistance again led to repeal. In March 1770, Parliament repealed all of the new duties except the one on tea, which, like the Declaratory Act, was left, in part, to save face and assert that Parliament still retained the right to tax the colonies. The character of colonial resistance had changed between 1765 and 1770. During the Stamp Act resistance, elites wrote resolves and held congresses while violent, popular mobs burned effigies and tore down houses, with minimal coordination between colonies. But methods of resistance against the Townshend Acts became more inclusive and more coordinated. Colonists previously excluded from meaningful political participation now gathered signatures, and colonists of all ranks participated in the resistance by not buying British goods and monitoring and enforcing the boycotts.

Britain’s failed attempts at imperial reform in the 1760s created an increasingly vigilant and resistant colonial population and, most importantly, an enlarged political sphere—both on the colonial and continental levels—far beyond anything anyone could have imagined a few years earlier. A new sense of shared grievances began to join the colonists in a shared American political identity.

Sign Up Today

Start your 14 day free trial today

The History Hit Miscellany of Facts, Figures and Fascinating Finds

• America 1765 - 1865

6 Key Causes of the American Revolution

14 Jan 2021

@histluketomes.

This educational video is a visual version of this article and presented by Artificial Intelligence (AI). Please see our AI ethics and diversity policy for more information on how we use AI and select presenters on our website.

The American War of Independence (1775-1783) served as a harsh lesson to the British Empire that the dominions they controlled, if treated improperly, would always be susceptible to revolution.

The British did not wish to see the thirteen colonies break away from their realm, yet their colonial policies in the late-18th century proved consistently disastrous, demonstrating a complete lack of empathy or common understanding with the American population.

One might argue that independence was always on the horizon in this period for North America, yet even in an era of enlightenment the British seemed, through sheer ignorance, negligence and pride, to seal their own fate.

As with any revolution in history, ideological differences may have provided the foundation and impetus for change, but it is so often the events in the run up to the internal struggle that enhance tensions and ultimately trigger the conflict. The American Revolution was no different. Here are 6 key causes of the American revolution.

1. Seven Years War (1756-1763)

Although the Seven Years War was a multinational conflict, the main belligerents were the British and French Empires. Each looking to expand their territory across numerous continents, both nations suffered mass casualties and racked up copious amounts of debt in order to fund the long and ardous struggle for territorial dominance.

Arguably the most important theatre of the war was in North America, which in 1756 had been geographically split between the empires of the British, French and Spanish. With key but costly victories at Quebec and Fort Niagara, the British were able to emerge victorious from the war and henceforth assimilated large swathes of previously held French territory in Canada and the Mid-West as a result of the Treaty of Paris in 1763.

After a three-month siege of Quebec City, British forces captured the city at the Plains of Abraham. Image credit: Hervey Smyth (1734-1811), Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

While British victory had removed any French and Native Indian threat (to an extent) to the thirteen colonies, the war had led to greater economic hardship in the US and an acknowledgment of the cultural differences between colonists and Britons.

Clashes in ideologies became all the more apparent as the British looked to levy higher taxes on the thirteen colonies in order to heal the debt they incurred from military and naval spending.

2. Taxes and Duties

If the Seven Years War had not exacerbated the divide between the colonies and the British metropole, the implementation of colonial taxation certainly did. The British witnessed these tensions first-hand when the Stamp Act of 1765 was introduced. Colonists bitterly opposed the new direct taxation on printed materials and forced the British Government to eventually repeal the legislation a year later.

“No taxation without representation” became an iconic slogan, as it effectively summarised the colonial outrage at the fact they were being taxed against their will and with no form of representation in Parliament.

A key cause of the American revolution which followed the Stamp Act was the introduction of Townshend Duties in 1767 and 1768. This was a series of acts that imposed new forms of indirect taxation of goods such as glass, paint, paper, lead and tea .

These duties caused outrage in the colonies and became the main root of spontaneous and violent opposition. Encouraged and rallied by propaganda leaflets and posters, such as those created by Paul Revere, colonists rioted and organised merchant boycotts. Eventually, the colonial response was met with fierce repression.

3. Boston Massacre (1770)

Just a year after the imposition of the Townshend Duties, the governor of Massachusetts was already calling for the other twelve colonies to join his state in resisting the British and boycotting their goods, which coincided with a riot in Boston over the seizure of a boat aptly named Liberty  for smuggling.

The Boston Massacre, 1770. Image credit: Paul Revere, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

Despite these tremors of discontent, nothing suggested that the colonies might seriously consider fighting their British masters until the infamous Boston massacre of March 1770. This was one of the most significant causes of the American revolution.

A detachment of redcoats were accosted by a large crowd in the city, and bombarded with snowballs and more dangerous missiles as the cold and frustrated townsfolk vented their anger on the soldiers. Suddenly, they opened fire after a soldier was knocked down, killing five and injuring six others.

The Boston Massacre is often represented as the inevitable start of a revolution, but in fact it initially prompted Lord North’s government to withdraw the Townshend Acts and for a time it seemed like the worst of the crisis was over. However, radicals such as Samuel Adams and Thomas Jefferson kept the resentment ticking over.

4. Boston Tea Party (1773)

A switch had been flicked. The British government had a chance to make important political concessions to these disgruntled voices, yet they chose not to, and with this decision, the opportunity to avert rebellion was lost.

In 1772, a British ship which had been enforcing unpopular trade regulations was burned by angry patriots, while Samuel Adams set about creating Committees of Correspondence – a network of rebels across all of the 13 colonies.

Boston Tea Party. Image credit: Cornischong at lb.wikipedia, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Yet it was in December 1773 that the most famous and overt display of anger and resistance took place. A group of colonists led by Adams hopped aboard the East India Company trade vessel Dartmouth and poured 342 chests of tea (worth close to $2,000,000 in today’s currency) of British tea into the sea at Boston Harbour. This act – now known as the ‘Boston Tea Party’, remains important in patriotic American folklore.

5. Intolerable Acts (1774)

Rather than attempting to appease the rebels, the Boston Tea Party was met with the passing of the Intolerable Acts in 1774 by the British Crown. These punitive measures included the forced closure of Boston port and an order of compensation to the East India Company for damaged property. Town meetings were now also banned, and the authority of the royal governor was increased.

The British lost further support and patriots formed the First Continental Congress in the same year, a body where men from all the colonies were formally represented. In Britain, opinion was divided as the Whigs favoured reform while North’s Tories wanted to demonstrate the power of the British Parliament. It would be the Tories who got their way.

In the meantime, the First Continental Congress raised a militia, and in April 1775 the first shots of the war were fired as British troops clashed with militia men at the twin battles of Lexington and Concord. British reinforcements landed in Massachusetts and defeated the rebels at Bunker Hill in June – the first major battle of the American War of Independence.

Shortly after, the British withdrew into Boston – where they were besieged by an army commanded by the newly appointed General, and future president, George Washington.

6. King George III’s Speech to Parliament (1775)

On 26 October 1775 George III , King of Great Britain, stood up in front of his Parliament and declared the American colonies to be in a state of rebellion. Here, for the first time, the use of force was authorised against the rebels. The King’s speech was long but certain phrases made it clear that a major war against his own subjects was about to commence:

“It is now become the part of wisdom, and (in its effects) of clemency, to put a speedy end to these disorders by the most decisive exertions. For this purpose, I have increased my naval establishment, and greatly augmented my land forces, but in such a manner as may be the least burthensome to my kingdoms.”

After such a speech, the Whig position was silenced and a full-scale war was inevitable. From it the United States of America would emerge, and the course of history radically changed.

You May Also Like

The Peasants’ Revolt: Rise of the Rebels

10 Myths About Winston Churchill

Medusa: What Was a Gorgon?

10 Facts About the Battle of Shrewsbury

5 of Our Top Podcasts About the Norman Conquest of 1066

How Did 3 People Seemingly Escape From Alcatraz?

5 of Our Top Documentaries About the Norman Conquest of 1066

1848: The Year of Revolutions

What Prompted the Boston Tea Party?

15 Quotes by Nelson Mandela

The History of Advent

The Princes in the Tower: Solving History’s Greatest Cold Case

The American Revolution

The causes of the american revolution.

Most immediately, the American Revolution resulted directly from attempts to reform the British Empire after the Seven Years’ War. The Seven Years’ War culminated nearly a half-century of war between Europe’s imperial powers. It was truly a world war, fought between multiple empires on multiple continents. At its conclusion, the British Empire had never been larger. Britain now controlled the North American continent east of the Mississippi River, including French Canada. It had also consolidated its control over India. But, for the ministry, the jubilation was short-lived. The realities and responsibilities of the post-war empire were daunting. War (let alone victory) on such a scale was costly. Britain doubled the national debt to 13.5 times its annual revenue. In addition to the costs incurred in securing victory, Britain was also looking at significant new costs required to secure and defend its far-flung empire, especially western frontiers of the North American colonies. These factors led Britain in the 1760s to attempt to consolidate control over its North American colonies, which, in turn, led to resistance.

King George III took the crown in 1760 and brought Tories into his Ministry after three decades of Whig rule. They represented an authoritarian vision of empire where colonies would be subordinate. The Royal Proclamation of 1763 was Britain’s first postwar imperial action. The King forbade settlement west of the Appalachian Mountains in attempt to limit costly wars with Native Americans. Colonists, however, protested and demanded access to the territory for which they had fought alongside the British.

In 1764, Parliament passed two more reforms. The Sugar Act sought to combat widespread smuggling of molasses in New England by cutting the duty in half but increasing enforcement. Also, smugglers would be tried by vice-admiralty courts and not juries. Parliament also passed the Currency Act, which restricted colonies from producing paper money. Hard money, like gold and silver coins, was scarce in the colonies. The lack of currency impeded the colonies’ increasingly sophisticated transatlantic economies, but it was especially damaging in 1764 because a postwar recession had already begun. Between the restrictions of the Proclamation of 1763, the Currency Act, and the Sugar Act’s canceling of trials-by-jury for smugglers, some colonists began to see a pattern of restriction and taxation.

In March 1765, Parliament passed the Stamp Act. The Sugar Act was an attempt to get merchants to pay an already-existing duty, but the Stamp Act created a new, direct (or internal) tax . Parliament had never before directly taxed the colonists. Instead, colonies contributed to the empire through the payment of indirect, internal taxes, such as customs duties. In 1765, Daniel Dulany of Maryland wrote, “A right to impose an internal tax on the colonies, without their consent for the single purpose of revenue, is denied, a right to regulate their trade without their consent is, admitted.”

Stamps were to be required on all printed documents, including newspapers, pamphlets, diplomas, legal documents, and even playing cards. Unlike the Sugar Act, which primarily affected merchants, the Stamp Act directly affected numerous groups including printers, lawyers, college graduates, and even sailors who played cards. This led, in part, to broader, more popular resistance.

Resistance took three forms, distinguished largely by class: legislative resistance by elites, economic resistance by merchants, and popular protest by common colonists. Colonial elites responded with legislative resistance initially by passing resolutions in their assemblies. The most famous of the anti-Stamp Act resolutions were the “Virginia Resolves” that declared that the colonists were entitled to “all the liberties, privileges, franchises, and immunities . . . possessed by the people of Great Britain.” When the resolves were printed throughout the colonies, however, they often included three extra, far more radical resolves not passed by the Virginia House of Burgesses, the last of which asserted that only “the general assembly of this colony have any right or power to impose or lay any taxation” and that anyone who argued differently “shall be deemed an enemy to this his majesty’s colony.” The spread of these extra resolves throughout the colonies helped radicalize the subsequent responses of other colonial assemblies and eventually led to the calling of the Stamp Act Congress in New York City in October 1765. Nine colonies sent delegates, including Benjamin Franklin, John Dickinson, Thomas Hutchinson, Philip Livingston, and James Otis.

Men and women politicized the domestic sphere by buying and displaying items that conspicuously revealed their position for or against Parliamentary actions. This witty teapot, which celebrates the end of taxation on goods like tea itself, makes clear the owner’s perspective on the egregious taxation. “Teapot, Stamp Act Repeal’d,” 1786, in Peabody Essex Museum. Salem State University .

The Stamp Act Congress issued a “Declaration of Rights and Grievances,” which, like the Virginia Resolves, declared allegiance to the King and “all due subordination” to Parliament, but also reasserted the idea that colonists were entitled to the same rights as native Britons. Those rights included trial by jury, which had been abridged by the Sugar Act, and the right to only be taxed by their own elected representatives. As Daniel Dulany wrote in 1765, “It is an essential principle of the English constitution, that the subject shall not be taxed without his consent.” Benjamin Franklin called it the “prime Maxim of all free Government.” Because the colonies did not elect members to Parliament, they believed that they were not represented and could not be taxed by that body. In response, Parliament and the Ministry argued that the colonists were “virtually represented,” just like the residents of those boroughs or counties in England that did not elect members to Parliament. However, the colonists rejected the notion of virtual representation, with one pamphleteer calling it a “monstrous idea.”

The second type of resistance to the Stamp Act was economic. While the Stamp Act Congress deliberated, merchants in major port cities were preparing non-importation agreements, hoping that their refusal to import British goods would lead British merchants to lobby for the repeal of the Stamp Act. The plan worked. As British exports to the colony dropped considerably, merchants did pressure Parliament to repeal.

The third, and perhaps, most crucial type of resistance was popular protest. Violent riots broke out in Boston, during which crowds, led by the local Sons of Liberty, burned the appointed stamp collector for Massachusetts, Peter Oliver, in effigy and pulled a building he owned “down to the Ground in five minutes.” Oliver resigned the position of stamp collector the next day. A few days later a crowd also set upon the home of his brother-in-law, Lt. Gov. Thomas Hutchinson, who had publicly argued for submission to the stamp tax. Before the evening was over, much of Hutchinson’s home and belongings had been destroyed.

Popular violence and intimidation spread quickly throughout the colonies. In New York City, posted notices read: “PRO PATRIA, The first Man that either distributes or makes use of stampt paper, let him take care of his house, person, and effects. Vox Populi. We dare.” By November 16, all of the original twelve stamp collectors had resigned, and by 1766, Sons of Liberty groups formed in most of the colonies to direct and organize further popular resistance. These tactics had the dual effect of sending a message to Parliament and discouraging colonists from accepting appointments as stamp collectors. With no one to distribute the stamps, the Act became unenforceable.

Violent protest by groups like the Sons of Liberty created quite a stir both in the colonies and in England itself. While extreme acts like the tarring and feathering of Boston’s Commissioner of Customs in 1774 propagated more protest against symbols of Parliament’s tyranny throughout the colonies, violent demonstrations were regarded as acts of terrorism by British officials. This print of the 1774 event was from the British perspective, picturing the Sons as brutal instigators with almost demonic smiles on their faces as they enacted this excruciating punishment on the Custom Commissioner. Philip Dawe (attributed), “The Bostonians Paying the Excise-man, or Tarring and Feathering,” Wikimedia .

Pressure on Parliament grew until, in March of 1766, they repealed the Stamp Act. But to save face and to try to avoid this kind of problem in the future, Parliament also passed the Declaratory Act, asserting that Parliament had the “full power and authority to make laws . . . to bind the colonies and people of America . . . in all cases whatsoever.” However, colonists were too busy celebrating the repeal of the Stamp Act to take much notice of the Declaratory Act. In New York City, the inhabitants raised a huge lead statue of King George III in honor of the Stamp Act’s repeal. It could be argued that there was no moment at which colonists felt more proud to be members of the free British Empire than 1766. But Britain still needed revenue from the colonies.

The colonies had resisted the implementation of direct taxes, but the Declaratory Act reserved Parliament’s right to impose them. And, in the colonists’ dispatches to Parliament and in numerous pamphlets, they had explicitly acknowledged the right of Parliament to regulate colonial trade. So Britain’s next attempt to draw revenues from the colonies, the Townshend Acts, were passed in June 1767, creating new customs duties on common items, like lead, glass, paint, and tea, instead of direct taxes. The Acts also created and strengthened formal mechanisms to enforce compliance, including a new American Board of Customs Commissioners and more vice-admiralty courts to try smugglers. Revenues from customs seizures would be used to pay customs officers and other royal officials, including the governors, thereby incentivizing them to convict offenders. These acts increased the presence of the British government in the colonies and circumscribed the authority of the colonial assemblies, since paying the governor’s salary gave the assemblies significant power over them. Unsurprisingly, colonists, once again, resisted.

Even though these were duties, many colonial resistance authors still referred to them as “taxes,” because they were designed primarily to extract revenues from the colonies not to regulate trade. John Dickinson, in his “Letters from a Pennsylvania Farmer,” wrote, “That we may legally be bound to pay any general duties on these commodities, relative to the regulation of trade, is granted; but we being obliged by her laws to take them from Great Britain, any special duties imposed on their exportation to us only, with intention to raise a revenue from us only, are as much taxes upon us, as those imposed by the Stamp Act.” Hence, many authors asked: once the colonists assented to a tax in any form , what would stop the British from imposing ever more and greater taxes on the colonists?

New forms of resistance emerged in which elite, middling, and working class colonists participated together. Merchants re-instituted non-importation agreements, and common colonists agreed not to consume these same products. Lists were circulated with signatories promising not to buy any British goods. These lists were often published in newspapers, bestowing recognition on those who had signed and led to pressure on those who had not.

Women, too, became involved to an unprecedented degree in resistance to the Townshend Acts. They circulated subscription lists and gathered signatures. The first political newspaper essays written by women appeared. Also, without new imports of British clothes, colonists took to wearing simple, homespun clothing. Spinning clubs were formed, in which local women would gather at one their homes and spin cloth for homespun clothing for their families and even for the community.

Homespun clothing quickly became a marker of one’s virtue and patriotism, and women were an important part of this cultural shift. At the same time, British goods and luxuries previously desired now became symbols of tyranny. Non-importation, and especially, non-consumption agreements changed colonists’ cultural relationship with the mother country. Committees of inspection that monitored merchants and residents to make sure that no one broke the agreements. Offenders could expect to have their names and offenses shamed in the newspaper and in broadsides.

Non-importation and non-consumption helped forge colonial unity. Colonies formed Committees of Correspondence to update the progress of resistance in each colony. Newspapers reprinted exploits of resistance, giving colonists a sense that they were part of a broader political community. The best example of this new “continental conversation” came in the wake of the “Boston Massacre.” Britain sent regiments to Boston in 1768 to help enforce the new acts and quell the resistance. On the evening of March 5, 1770, a crowd gathered outside the Custom House and began hurling insults, snowballs, and perhaps more at the young sentry. When a small number of soldiers came to the sentry’s aid, the crowd grew increasingly hostile until the soldiers fired. After the smoke cleared, five Bostonians were dead, including Crispus Attucks, a former slave turned free dockworker. The soldiers were tried in Boston and won acquittal, thanks, in part, to their defense attorney, John Adams. News of the “Boston Massacre” spread quickly through the new resistance communication networks, aided by a famous engraving attributed to Paul Revere, which depicted bloodthirsty British soldiers with grins on their faces firing into a peaceful crowd. The engraving was quickly circulated and reprinted throughout the colonies, generating sympathy for Boston and anger with Britain.

This iconic image of the Boston Massacre by Paul Revere sparked fury in both Americans and the British by portraying the redcoats as brutal slaughterers and the onlookers as helpless victims. The events of March 5, 1770 did not actually play out as Revere pictured them, yet his intention was not simply to recount the affair. Revere created an effective propaganda piece that lent credence to those demanding that the British authoritarian rule be stopped. Paul Revere (engraver), “The bloody massacre perpetrated in King Street Boston on March 5th 1770 by a party of the 29th Regt.,” 1770. Library of Congress .

Resistance again led to repeal. In March of 1770, Parliament repealed all of the new duties except the one on tea, which, like the Declaratory Act, was left to save face and assert that Parliament still retained the right to tax the colonies. The character of colonial resistance had changed between 1765 and 1770. During the Stamp Act resistance, elites wrote resolves and held congresses while violent, popular mobs burned effigies and tore down houses, with minimal coordination between colonies. But methods of resistance against the Townshend Acts became more inclusive and more coordinated. Colonists previously excluded from meaningful political participation now gathered signatures, and colonists of all ranks participated in the resistance by not buying British goods.

Britain’s failed attempts at imperial reform in the 1760s created an increasingly vigilant and resistant colonial population and, most importantly, an enlarged political sphere — both on the colonial and continental levels—far beyond anything anyone could have imagined a few years earlier. A new sense of shared grievances began to join the colonists in a shared American political identity.

• American Yawp. Located at : http://www.americanyawp.com/index.html . Project : American Yawp. License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike

America's Wars, Causes of

Terminology, reference sources, search suggestions, primary sources.

• War of 1812
• Mexican War
• Spanish-American War
• World War I
• World War II
• Vietnam War
• Persian Gulf Wars

Poli Sci and Peace Studies Librarian

Hesburgh Library 148 Hesburgh Library University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, IN 46556

(574) 631-8901 [email protected]

• American Revolution
• American Revolutionary War
• American War for Independence
• Revolutionary War (United States)
• The American Revolution by Gordon S. Wood ISBN: 9781598533774 Publication Date: 2015-07-28 The volume includes an introduction, headnotes, a chronology of events, biographical notes about the writers, and detailed explanatory notes, all prepared by our leading expert on the American Revolution. As a special feature, each pamphlet is preceded by a typographic reproduction of its original title page.
• The American Revolution 1775-1783 by Richard L. Blanco (Editor) Call Number: 10th Floor Reading Room E 208 .A433 1993 ISBN: 082405623X Publication Date: 1993-03-01 ... this panoramic reference comprises some 700 detailed mini-essays on battles, campaigns, skirmishes, raids, massacres, and sea fights, along with approximately 400 biographical sketches.
• Atlas of early American history : the Revolutionary era, 1760-1790 by Lester Jesse Cappon Publication Date: 1976
• Atlas of the American Revolution by Kenneth Nebenzahl Publication Date: 1974
• Blackwell Encyclopedia of the American Revolution by Jack P. Greene (Editor); J. R. Pole (Editor) ISBN: 1557862443 Publication Date: 1992-04-15 This encyclopedia, to which many of the foremost scholars in the field have contributed, describes clearly and readably the many different ideas and events that constitute what we know as the American Revolution. Equally suitable for browsing and as a reference source, and illustrated with many paintings, drawings and documents of the period, this substantial volume is likely to remain a standard work on the subject for many years to come.
• The Encyclopedia of Colonial and Revolutionary America by John Mack Faragher (Editor) ISBN: 0816017441 Publication Date: 1988-12-01 Spanning the entire colonial period - from the earliest settlements of the 16th century to the 1783 Treaty of Paris, which concluded the American Revolution - this reference work contains 1500 alphabetical entries. The ideas, events, people and developments which defined the birth of the United States have been brought together in a volume which emphasizes key discoveries, battles and trends which shaped the era.
• Encyclopedia of the American Revolution by Mark Mayo Boatner Publication Date: 1966
• The Historical Atlas of the American Revolution by Ian Barnes; Charles Royster (Editor) Call Number: Reference Collection [2nd Floor] E 208 .B36 2000 ISBN: 0415922437 Publication Date: 2000-08-03
• Historical Dictionary of the American Revolution by Terry M. Mays ISBN: 0810834049 Publication Date: 1999-01-14 The Southern campaigns from 1778 to 1781, which are often scantily detailed in American Revolution histories, receive full discussion in this dictionary.
• New American Revolution Handbook by Theodore P. Savas; J. David Dameron ISBN: 9781611210620 Publication Date: 2010-07-01 "The authors use clear and concise writing broken down into short and easy to understand chapters complete with original maps, tables, charts, and dozens of drawings to trace the history of the Revolution from the beginning of the conflict through the final surrender in 1783."
• The Oxford Handbook of the American Revolution by Edward G. Gray (Editor); Jane Kamensky (Editor) ISBN: 9780199746705 Publication Date: 2012-12-06 The Oxford Handbook of the American Revolution introduces scholars, students and generally interested readers to the formative event in American history. In thirty-three individual essays, by thirty-three authorities on the Revolution, the Handbook provides readers with in-depth analysis ofthe Revolution's many sides, ranging from the military and diplomatic to the social and political; from the economic and financial, to the cultural and legal.

Books, Documents, Videos, etc.

For materials held by Notre Dame analyzing the causes of the revolution use:

• Advanced Search
• and enter: 
• United States History Revolution, 1775-1783 Causes

For materials providing contemporary (1750-1785) opinion & analysis use:

• "great britain" OR england OR "united kingdom") AND ("united states" OR america*) AND relations AND causes
• "great britain" AND ("united states" OR america*) AND colonies AND [ an issue OR topic OR colony name ] 
• Use "facets" (left column) to further narrow results

For materials held by other libraries:

• Repeat search in WorldCat

For scholarly articles:

In one or more of the recommended article databases

• ("united states" OR america*) AND (revolution* OR independence) AND (cause* OR origin OR origins)
• ("great britain" OR engl*) AND ("united states" OR america*) AND colonies AND [ an issue OR topic OR colony name, e.g. taxation]
• limit search terms to title, subject or abstract,
• adjust search by adding or removing or modifying search terms, and/or
• limiting search results to "peer reviewed" or "refereed" articles.

For contemporaneous popular opinion & analysis (1750 - 1785):

• adjust search by adding or removing or modifying search terms

Tip: Do not truncate (use the *) with origin. This will retrieve "original" material dealing with the actual conduct of the war rather than its causes. Therefore it may produce many irrelevant records.

Sample Published Collections of Primary Source Materials

• The road to independence : a documentary history of the causes of the American Revolution: 1763-1776 by John. Braeman Publication Date: 1963 Hesburgh Library Lower Level (Ranges 1 - 38) (E 203 .B812 )
• The American Revolution by John H. Rhodehamel (Editor) Call Number: General Collection E 203 .A579 2001 ISBN: 1883011914 Publication Date: 2001-04-01 Drawn from letters, diaries, newspaper articles, public declarations, contemporary narratives, and private memoranda this title brings together over 120 pieces by more than 70 participants to create a unique literary panorama of the War of Independence. It includes a chronology of events, biographical and explanatory notes, and an index.
• Sources and documents illustrating the American revolution, 1764-1788, and the formation of the federal Constitution by Samuel Eliot Morison Publication Date: 1929 General Collection E 203 .M826s
• Declaration of Independence in Historical Context by Barry Alan Shain ISBN: 0300159056 Publication Date: 2014-01-01 General Collection E 221 .D38 2014
• The Remembrancer, or impartial repository of public events Publication Date: 1775 Microforms [Lower Level] Newspaper Collection Microfilm N13 reel 5863-5865
• The American Revolution by Gordon S. Wood Call Number: General Collection E 203 .A5787 2015 ISBN: 9781598533774 Publication Date: 2015-07-28 "a landmark collection of British and American pamphlets from the political debate that divided an empire and created a nation... The volume includes an introduction, headnotes, a chronology of events, biographical notes about the writers, and detailed explanatory notes... As a special feature, each pamphlet is preceded by a typographic reproduction of its original title page."

For other collections of primary source held by Notre Dame use:

• united states history revolution, 1775-1783
• (cause* OR origin OR origins) AND ( sources OR documents)

Tip:  Do not truncate (use the *) with origin.  This will retrieve "original" material dealing with the actual conduct of the war rather than its causes.  Therefore it may produce many irrelevant records.

Also see the "American Memory" project at Library of Congress Collections .

• A complete collection of all the protests of the peers in Parliament, entered on their journals, since the year 1774, on the great questions of the cause and issue of the war between Great-Britain and America, &c to the present time.
• Journal of the Committee of the States containing the proceedings from the first Friday in June, 1784, to the second Friday in August, 1784. Published by order of Congress
• << Previous: Overview
• Next: War of 1812 >>
• Last Updated: Oct 26, 2023 9:33 AM
• URL: https://libguides.library.nd.edu/causes-of-american-wars

Need help? Ask us.

Report a problem

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

Revolutionary War

By: History.com Editors

Updated: August 11, 2023 | Original: October 29, 2009

The Revolutionary War (1775-83), also known as the American Revolution, arose from growing tensions between residents of Great Britain’s 13 North American colonies and the colonial government, which represented the British crown.

Skirmishes between British troops and colonial militiamen in Lexington and Concord in April 1775 kicked off the armed conflict, and by the following summer, the rebels were waging a full-scale war for their independence.

France entered the American Revolution on the side of the colonists in 1778, turning what had essentially been a civil war into an international conflict. After French assistance helped the Continental Army force the British surrender at Yorktown, Virginia, in 1781, the Americans had effectively won their independence, though fighting did not formally end until 1783.

Causes of the Revolutionary War

For more than a decade before the outbreak of the American Revolution in 1775, tensions had been building between colonists and the British authorities.

The French and Indian War , or Seven Years’ War (1756-1763), brought new territories under the power of the crown, but the expensive conflict lead to new and unpopular taxes. Attempts by the British government to raise revenue by taxing the colonies (notably the Stamp Act of 1765, the Townshend Acts of 1767 and the Tea Act of 1773) met with heated protest among many colonists, who resented their lack of representation in Parliament and demanded the same rights as other British subjects. 

Colonial resistance led to violence in 1770, when British soldiers opened fire on a mob of colonists, killing five men in what was known as the Boston Massacre . After December 1773, when a band of Bostonians altered their appearance to hide their identity boarded British ships and dumped 342 chests of tea into Boston Harbor during the Boston Tea Party , an outraged Parliament passed a series of measures (known as the Intolerable, or Coercive Acts ) designed to reassert imperial authority in Massachusetts .

Did you know? Now most famous as a traitor to the American cause, General Benedict Arnold began the Revolutionary War as one of its earliest heroes, helping lead rebel forces in the capture of Fort Ticonderoga in May 1775.

In response, a group of colonial delegates (including George Washington of Virginia , John and Samuel Adams of Massachusetts, Patrick Henry of Virginia and John Jay of New York ) met in Philadelphia in September 1774 to give voice to their grievances against the British crown. This First Continental Congress did not go so far as to demand independence from Britain, but it denounced taxation without representation, as well as the maintenance of the British army in the colonies without their consent. It issued a declaration of the rights due every citizen, including life, liberty, property, assembly and trial by jury. The Continental Congress voted to meet again in May 1775 to consider further action, but by that time violence had already broken out. 

On the night of April 18, 1775, hundreds of British troops marched from Boston to nearby Concord, Massachusetts in order to seize an arms cache. Paul Revere and other riders sounded the alarm, and colonial militiamen began mobilizing to intercept the Redcoats. On April 19, local militiamen clashed with British soldiers in the Battles of Lexington and Concord in Massachusetts, marking the “shot heard round the world” that signified the start of the Revolutionary War. 

HISTORY Vault: The Revolution

From the roots of the rebellion to the adoption of the U.S. Constitution, explore this pivotal era in American history through sweeping cinematic recreations.

Declaring Independence (1775-76)

When the Second Continental Congress convened in Philadelphia, delegates—including new additions Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson —voted to form a Continental Army, with Washington as its commander in chief. On June 17, in the Revolution’s first major battle, colonial forces inflicted heavy casualties on the British regiment of General William Howe at Breed’s Hill in Boston. The engagement, known as the Battle of Bunker Hill , ended in British victory, but lent encouragement to the revolutionary cause. 

Throughout that fall and winter, Washington’s forces struggled to keep the British contained in Boston, but artillery captured at Fort Ticonderoga in New York helped shift the balance of that struggle in late winter. The British evacuated the city in March 1776, with Howe and his men retreating to Canada to prepare a major invasion of New York.

By June 1776, with the Revolutionary War in full swing, a growing majority of the colonists had come to favor independence from Britain. On July 4 , the Continental Congress voted to adopt the Declaration of Independence , drafted by a five-man committee including Franklin and John Adams but written mainly by Jefferson. That same month, determined to crush the rebellion, the British government sent a large fleet, along with more than 34,000 troops to New York. In August, Howe’s Redcoats routed the Continental Army on Long Island; Washington was forced to evacuate his troops from New York City by September. Pushed across the Delaware River , Washington fought back with a surprise attack in Trenton, New Jersey , on Christmas night and won another victory at Princeton to revive the rebels’ flagging hopes before making winter quarters at Morristown.

Saratoga: Revolutionary War Turning Point (1777-78)

British strategy in 1777 involved two main prongs of attack aimed at separating New England (where the rebellion enjoyed the most popular support) from the other colonies. To that end, General John Burgoyne’s army marched south from Canada toward a planned meeting with Howe’s forces on the Hudson River . Burgoyne’s men dealt a devastating loss to the Americans in July by retaking Fort Ticonderoga, while Howe decided to move his troops southward from New York to confront Washington’s army near the Chesapeake Bay. The British defeated the Americans at Brandywine Creek, Pennsylvania , on September 11 and entered Philadelphia on September 25. Washington rebounded to strike Germantown in early October before withdrawing to winter quarters near Valley Forge .

Howe’s move had left Burgoyne’s army exposed near Saratoga, New York, and the British suffered the consequences of this on September 19, when an American force under General Horatio Gates defeated them at Freeman’s Farm in the first Battle of Saratoga . After suffering another defeat on October 7 at Bemis Heights (the Second Battle of Saratoga), Burgoyne surrendered his remaining forces on October 17. The American victory Saratoga would prove to be a turning point of the American Revolution, as it prompted France (which had been secretly aiding the rebels since 1776) to enter the war openly on the American side, though it would not formally declare war on Great Britain until June 1778. The American Revolution, which had begun as a civil conflict between Britain and its colonies, had become a world war.

Stalemate in the North, Battle in the South (1778-81)

During the long, hard winter at Valley Forge, Washington’s troops benefited from the training and discipline of the Prussian military officer Baron Friedrich von Steuben (sent by the French) and the leadership of the French aristocrat Marquis de Lafayette . On June 28, 1778, as British forces under Sir Henry Clinton (who had replaced Howe as supreme commander) attempted to withdraw from Philadelphia to New York, Washington’s army attacked them near Monmouth, New Jersey. The battle effectively ended in a draw, as the Americans held their ground, but Clinton was able to get his army and supplies safely to New York. On July 8, a French fleet commanded by the Comte d’Estaing arrived off the Atlantic coast, ready to do battle with the British. A joint attack on the British at Newport, Rhode Island , in late July failed, and for the most part the war settled into a stalemate phase in the North.

The Americans suffered a number of setbacks from 1779 to 1781, including the defection of General Benedict Arnold to the British and the first serious mutinies within the Continental Army. In the South, the British occupied Georgia by early 1779 and captured Charleston, South Carolina in May 1780. British forces under Lord Charles Cornwallis then began an offensive in the region, crushing Gates’ American troops at Camden in mid-August, though the Americans scored a victory over Loyalist forces at King’s Mountain in early October. Nathanael Green replaced Gates as the American commander in the South that December. Under Green’s command, General Daniel Morgan scored a victory against a British force led by Colonel Banastre Tarleton at Cowpens, South Carolina, on January 17, 1781.

Revolutionary War Draws to a Close (1781-83)

By the fall of 1781, Greene’s American forces had managed to force Cornwallis and his men to withdraw to Virginia’s Yorktown peninsula, near where the York River empties into Chesapeake Bay. Supported by a French army commanded by General Jean Baptiste de Rochambeau, Washington moved against Yorktown with a total of around 14,000 soldiers, while a fleet of 36 French warships offshore prevented British reinforcement or evacuation. Trapped and overpowered, Cornwallis was forced to surrender his entire army on October 19. Claiming illness, the British general sent his deputy, Charles O’Hara, to surrender; after O’Hara approached Rochambeau to surrender his sword (the Frenchman deferred to Washington), Washington gave the nod to his own deputy, Benjamin Lincoln, who accepted it.

Though the movement for American independence effectively triumphed at the Battle of Yorktown , contemporary observers did not see that as the decisive victory yet. British forces remained stationed around Charleston, and the powerful main army still resided in New York. Though neither side would take decisive action over the better part of the next two years, the British removal of their troops from Charleston and Savannah in late 1782 finally pointed to the end of the conflict. British and American negotiators in Paris signed preliminary peace terms in Paris late that November, and on September 3, 1783, Great Britain formally recognized the independence of the United States in the Treaty of Paris . At the same time, Britain signed separate peace treaties with France and Spain (which had entered the conflict in 1779), bringing the American Revolution to a close after eight long years.

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

Home — Essay Samples — History — History of the United States — American Revolutionary War

Essays on American Revolutionary War

Chains chapter summary, rhetorical devices in patrick henry's speech, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Women's Participation in The American Revolutionary War

The major contributions of crispus attucks and peter salem to the liberation and sovereignty of america during the american revolutionary war, american revolutionary war and the changes it caused on political, social and cultural levels, the american revolutionary war: the battles of lexington and concord, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

The Tremendous Battle at Germantown

The effects of the american revolution, smallpox role in the revolutionary war, the goals of the colonists in the revolutionary war, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

The Second American Revolution: Its Impact and Legacy

The problems the united states had with paying debts after the revolutionary war, the boston siege: american revolution war, the context of the american revolutionary war from a historical perspective, the features that contribute to the unique character of the american revolutionary war, the difference between american and french revolutions, the battle of saratoga, insurgency and asymmetric warfare in the american revolutionary war  , joseph plumb martin and his role in the revolutionary war, war on the colonies: french, indian war and american revolution, what influenced the patriots' win in the revolutionary war, causes of the american revolution: political, economic and ideolodical, an analytical dive into the battle of yorktown, revolutionary war geographic advantages, valley forge: a test of resilience, the pros and cons of the articles of confederation.

April 19, 1775 – September 3, 1783

Eastern North America, North Atlantic Ocean, the West Indies

Battle of Brandywine, Battle of Bunker Hill, Battle of Monmouth, Battles of Saratoga, Battle of Bemis Heights

United States War of Independence, Revolutionary War

Before the flare-up of the American Revolutionary War, there had been growing tensions and conflicts between the British crown and its thirteen colonies. Attempts by the British government to raise revenue by taxing the colonies met with heated protest among many colonists. The Stamp Act and Townshend Acts provoked colonial opposition and unrest, leading to the 1770 Boston Massacre and 1773 Boston Tea Party.

By June 1776, a growing majority of the colonists had come to favor independence from Britain. On July 4, the Continental Congress voted to adopt the Declaration of Independence drafted largely by Thomas Jefferson.

In March 1776, the British led by General William Howe retreated to Canada to prepare for a major invasion of New York. A large British fleet was sent to New York with the aim to crush the rebellion. Routed by Howe’s Redcoats on Long Island, Washington’s troops were forced to evacuate from New York City. However, the surprise attack in Trenton and the battle near Princeton, New Jersey after that, marked another small victory for the colonials and revived the flagging hopes of the rebels.

British strategy in 1777 involved two main prongs of attack aimed at separating New England from the other colonies. Following the American victory in Battle of Saratoga, France and America signed treaties of alliance on February 6, 1778, in which France provided America with troops and warships.

On September 3, 1783, the Treaty of Paris, signed in Paris by Great Britain and by the United States of America, officially ended the American Revolutionary War.

Britain recognized the United States of America as an independent country. The Constitution was written in 1787 to amend the weak Articles of Confederation and it organized the basic political institutions and formed the three branches of government: judicial, executive, and legislative.

Relevant topics

• Great Depression
• Civil Rights Movement
• Florence Kelley
• Benjamin Franklin
• Wright Brothers
• American Flag
• Trust in Presidency
• African American History

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• Curriculum Development Team
• Content Contributors
• Getting Started: Baseline Assessments
• Getting Started: Resources to Enhance Instruction
• Getting Started: Instructional Routines
• Unit 9.1: Global 1 Introduction
• Unit 9.2: The First Civilizations
• Unit 9.3: Classical Civilizations
• Unit 9.4: Political Powers and Achievements
• Unit 9.5: Social and Cultural Growth and Conflict
• Unit 9.6: Ottoman and Ming Pre-1600
• Unit 9.7: Transformation of Western Europe and Russia
• Unit 9.8: Africa and the Americas Pre-1600
• Unit 9.9: Interactions and Disruptions
• Unit 10.0: Global 2 Introduction
• Unit 10.1: The World in 1750 C.E.
• Unit 10.2: Enlightenment, Revolution, and Nationalism
• Unit 10.3: Industrial Revolution
• Unit 10.4: Imperialism
• Unit 10.5: World Wars
• Unit 10.6: Cold War Era
• Unit 10.7: Decolonization and Nationalism
• Unit 10.8: Cultural Traditions and Modernization
• Unit 10.9: Globalization and the Changing Environment
• Unit 10.10: Human Rights Violations
• Unit 11.0: US History Introduction
• Unit 11.1: Colonial Foundations

Unit 11.2: American Revolution

• Unit 11.3A: Building a Nation
• Unit 11.03B: Sectionalism & the Civil War
• Unit 11.4: Reconstruction
• Unit 11.5: Gilded Age and Progressive Era
• Unit 11.6: Rise of American Power
• Unit 11.7: Prosperity and Depression
• Unit 11.8: World War II
• Unit 11.9: Cold War
• Unit 11.10: Domestic Change
• Resources: Regents Prep: Global 2 Exam
• Regents Prep: Framework USH Exam: Regents Prep: US Exam
• Find Resources

American Revolution

Dbq: causes of the american revolution, using evidence: nys regents style dbq.

U.S. History

American Revolution: DBQ: Causes of the American Revolution

Students will examine and evaluate primary and secondary source documents to construct an essay that analyzes the causes of the American Revolution.

Teacher Feedback

Please comment below with questions, feedback, suggestions, or descriptions of your experience using this resource with students.

If you found an error in the resource, please let us know so we can correct it by filling out this form . 

American Revolutionary War: Causes and Outcomes Essay

1. The sociopolitical climate in England in the 1760’s was marked by general conservatism. The 1600’s had been a time of great turmoil and upheaval in England.

The country had faced a bloody civil war, the temporary overthrow of the monarchy, religious battles between Protestants and Catholics, and finally the Glorious Revolution. As a result of this turmoil, the English ruling class was generally intolerant of any type of religious or political innovation.

The Anglican Church of England dominated English life, and other Protestant denominations were forced to pay taxes to subsidize the Anglicans (Middlekauff, 1982). Of course, Catholics and Jews fared even worse, and were denied basic political rights.

Unlike other European nations, England had mixed government as opposed to an absolute monarchy. However, most members of the House of Commons were more concerned about obtaining offices for themselves than about public policy.

The King selected his ministers and usually was able to implement his policies. Most English political leaders spent little time thinking about their American colonies, but naturally assumed that the colonies were subordinate to the mother country.

By the 1760’s England had become the most powerful country in Europe, and its leaders were more concerned about its rivalry with France than about the colonies.

In contrast, the American colonies were generally more tolerant of other religions. The colonies had been settled by people looking for the freedom to practice their religion. They had left Europe to escape religious persecution, and reacted angrily to what they perceived were affronts to their rights.

While most colonies did have an official religion, members of other religions were treated better than in England. Due to the great distance between England and North America, the colonies were largely self-governing.

The colonists did think of themselves as Englishmen, but believed that they would be left to govern themselves. To the colonists, this right of self-government was a basic English right.

Immigrants from other European countries poured into the colonies throughout the 18 th century, and they added to the somewhat rebellious character of the colonies. The Scotch-Irish were probably the largest immigrant group.

They were Presbyterians who had been barred from holding office in Ireland (Middlekauff, 1982). Many German Protestants also came to the colonies. Some Dutch, Swedish, and Scottish immigrants came as well. Of course, the largest “immigrant” group consisted of the African slaves, who obviously did not come willingly.

These immigrants helped create enormous population growth in the colonies (Brown, 2000). They also contributed to the growth of the American economy. Although there were many poor people in the colonies, there was likely not as much of a gap between the rich and the poor as there was in England.

Of course, there were many differences among the 13 colonies. The coastal cities seem to have had more social stratification than the backcountry. There were many wealthy plantation owners, but most colonists in the backcountry were middling farmers.

The cities contained many wealthy merchants, as well as large numbers of the urban poor. Slavery existed in all the colonies in the 1760’s, but had become more prevalent in the South by that point. In general, the colonists thought of themselves as Englishmen first, and then as residents of their colony.

There was little sense of a unified colonial identity. This only started in change during the 1760’s, as the colonists saw the English government imposing indignities on all the colonies.

2. Following the French and Indian War, England faced the task of paying off its large national debt. Fighting a war thousands of miles away in North America was extremely expensive.

Winning the war actually added to England’s costs. England gained the colony of Canada from France after the war, but the loyalty of the largely French-speaking Canadian colonists to England was doubtful. England also felt the need to protect the 13 colonies from Indians in its newly acquired Western territories (and often to protect the Indians from the colonists).

As a result, the British House of Commons decided to maintain a standing army in North America. Englishmen had normally been wary of standing armies, but there was surprisingly little though about how the colonists would react. This may have been the first sign that Parliament regarded the colonists as something less than full Englishmen.

Of course, maintaining a standing army is also expensive. The English government recognized that keeping a standing army in North America would benefit the entire British Empire, and England actually planned to pay most of the costs (Middlekauff, 1982).

Since the troops were supposedly being kept in North America for the colonists’ benefit, though, the ministry believed that the colonists should pay a portion of the costs.

Because of this, the House of Commons imposed taxes on molasses and stamps in the colonies. The taxes on stamps were later repealed, but eventually replaced with new taxes on tea.

The colonists vehemently objected to all the taxes, and claimed that Parliament had no right to impose taxes on the colonies since the colonists were not represented in the House of Commons.

The colonists admitted that England had the right to receive tax revenue from the colonies, but they claimed that the taxes needed to be imposed by the colonial legislatures themselves.

At the time in England, the prevailing idea was that taxes were a “gift” from the people to the King. Since they were a “gift,” they could only be imposed by the people themselves in the House of Commons (Middlekauff, 1982).

The British economic problems could only have been avoided with a less bellicose foreign policy. At the time, the British and the French were battling to gain as many colonies as possible. Besides the prestige involved, both countries believed that trade with colonies would make their countries more prosperous.

Even if this was true, fighting wars to gain new colonies was expensive enough to cancel out any economic gains. Imposing taxes to pay for the costs only angered the colonists, which required more troops in the colonies to keep the peace.

The political fallout in the 13 colonies was largely the result of the arrogant attitude of British officials. They looked at the colonists as wayward children rather than as fellow Englishmen.

When the colonists objected to the Stamp Act, the British government refused to even listen to the colonists’ arguments about representation. By the 1770’s, King George III believed that England always had to maintain at least one tax on the colonists simply to “keep up the right” (Middlekauff, 1982).

The taxes only angered the colonists, and many colonists decided to no longer purchase British goods. Forgetting about the taxes and simply continuing an active trade with the colonies would probably have generated more revenue for England.

The government was more flexible with its new Canadian colony, likely because it did not take Canada’s loyalty for granted. The British respected the language and Catholic faith of French-Canadians.

3. The colonists reacted furiously to British taxes in the 1760’s and 1770’s. When the Stamp Act was passed in 1765, several colonial legislatures passed resolutions claiming that the House of Commons had no right to impose taxes on the colonies. Riots broke out in the colonies over the taxes, and the homes of several British officials were burned down.

The colonial reaction only stiffened Parliament’s resolve. Supporters of the taxes claimed that the colonists were “virtually” represented in Parliament. The Stamp Act was eventually repealed, but only on the grounds that the tax was inexpedient.

At the same time, a Declaratory Act was passed stating that Parliament had the right to bind the colonies “in all cases whatsoever (Middlekauff, 1982). The Townshend Acts were passed later to impose new taxes and punish the colonists for their defiance.

The Townshend Acts imposed taxes on tea, and used the revenue to pay the salaries of colonial officials to assert control over them. The Acts also suspended the New York colonial legislature until it agreed to quarter British troops.

Colonial resistance only increased in response to the Townshend Acts. Many colonists started boycotting British goods. More riots broke out in Boston, and British troops were eventually sent in to occupy the city and enforce the Townshend Acts.

Continued unrest eventually resulted in the Boston Massacre in 1770 (Brown, 2000). Most of the Townshend Acts were eventually repealed, but the tax on tea remained so Parliament could “keep up the right” to tax the colonies.

This tax was the motivation for the Boston Tea Party in 1773. Parliament reacted to the Boston Tea Party by closing Boston’s port and bringing the government of Massachusetts under British control with the Coercive Acts.

By this point, the political break between Great Britain and the 13 colonies was nearly complete. The colonists called for the First Continental Congress in 1774 in response to the Coercive Acts. At the Congress, colonial representatives agreed to boycott British goods and to support Massachusetts in case of British attack.

The battles at Lexington and Concord the following year completed the break, and marked the start of the Revolutionary War.

The main grievance of the colonists – taxation without representation – was legitimate. The fact that the colonists made this argument shows that they initially considered themselves to be Englishmen, with all the rights of Englishmen.

The British reaction to the protests demonstrates that they looked at the colonists as children in need of punishment rather than as fellow Englishmen. Even after repealing some of the taxes, the British imposed new taxes simply to assert their authority over the colonists.

The Townshend Acts were one of the main turning points in the crisis. The Stamp Act had already been repealed, and the controversy in the colonies was dying down. The Townshend Acts reignited the debate. Beyond the tea tax, the suspension of the New York colonial legislature showed that England had little respect for the colonists’ political rights.

Of course, it is impossible to defend all the actions of the colonists. In retrospect, rioting, burning down houses, and tarring and feathering British officials cannot be condoned.

However, most of the violence only happened after the British government completely dismissed colonial protests over the taxes. The occupation of Boston by British troops only served to further provoke the colonists, and set the stage for the American Revolution.

4. The main argument in the Declaration of Independence was that Great Britain had denied the colonists their natural rights. It argued that Britain and the colonies had a fundamental understanding defining their relationship, and that Britain had violated that understanding (Middlekauff, 1982).

Not only had Parliament imposed taxes on the colonies without their consent, but it had also disbanded colonial legislative bodies and brought colonial officials under its control. The Declaration of Independence stressed these repeated injuries, and argued that these acts had broken the political chains between Great Britain and the colonies.

The Declaration of Independence also emphasized the colonists’ repeated attempts to seek the peaceful redress of their protests. Delegates at the Second Continental Congress knew that declaring independence was a controversial step. Right up to July 1776, many supporters of the colonial cause were uneasy about taking this final step.

The Declaration of Independence lists these petitions for redress, and discusses how they were brutally rejected by King George III and his ministers. Instead of listening to the colonists’ views, the King had sent troops – including foreign Hessians – to North America to crush the colonists.

As a result of these repeated injuries, Great Britain had violated the unwritten contract between the mother country and the colonies. Therefore, the Declaration of Independence argued that the colonists were justified in taking the extraordinary step of renouncing allegiance to the British crown.

Of course, the most well-known phrase in the Declaration of Independence is the assertion that “all men are created equal.” Even at the time, many Britons mocked the idea of slaveholding colonists claiming that all men were created equal. Today, the hypocrisy of the statement is obvious.

In the colonists’ defense, many of them were also uncomfortable with the contradiction. In the original draft of the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson unconvincingly attempted to blame King George III for the expansion of the slave trade to North America (Middlekauff, 1982).

The Second Continental Congress though it best to avoid the subject altogether, and deleted the references to the slave trade. This acceptance of slavery is the most obvious way that the United States failed to live up to the ideals in the Declaration of Independence.

However, it should be noted that the United States in 1776 did live up to the ideals in the Declaration of Independence in many ways. The colonists were fighting for the right of people to be governed by their own chosen representatives.

Great Britain viewed the colonists as subordinate to the mother country, and claimed that it had the right to bind the colonies in all cases. Also, while there were obviously great disparities in wealth in the colonies, the United States had no formal aristocracy. In these ways, the United States already lived up to the ideal of all men being created equal.

The Declaration of Independence was obviously a revolutionary document, but in some ways it was merely a re-assertion of rights already existing in the English constitution. The right to choose one’s own representatives was a uniquely English right.

The idea that taxes were the “free gift” of the people to the King was also an English concept. The colonists thought that Great Britain had grown corrupt and decadent and had forgotten these ideas. In the colonists’ view, declaring independence from Great Britain was the only way they could maintain these English principles.

5. American troops fought the Revolutionary War in an untraditional manner. Traditional European military ideas called for large armies to meet one other in battle head-on. However, General Washington knew that the Americans were severely outnumbered and lacking in military expertise.

Fighting the Revolutionary War in a traditional manner would have been disastrous. Meeting the British army in massive battles would have resulted in the destruction of the American army.

As a result, Washington fought what he called a “war of posts” (Middlekauff, 1982). This strategy called for a defensive approach. The Americans sought to hold on to territory that they already held. Early in the war, though, the Americans made little effort to recapture territory that they had lost (such as New York).

Instead of battling to retake New York City, Washington concentrated on withdrawing his troops successfully so that they could live to fight another day. This was for several reasons. Washington obviously realized that the raw, untrained American troops could not defeat the British army alone.

However, he believed time was on his side. More time would allow him to train his troops. He also knew that the British were operating on the Americans’ territory. To win the war, Great Britain had to crush the rebellion and destroy the American armies. On the other hand, the Americans merely had to stay alive to continue the war.

While the American troops used a largely defensive strategy, Washington was perfectly willing to take the offensive when his troops had the advantage of surprise. At the Battle of Trenton, American troops crossed the Delaware River and caught Hessian troops by surprise.

This victory inspired the Americans when it appeared that the war might be lost. Washington also sought to react quickly to British campaigns. At Saratoga, the British campaign failed, and the Americans captured British General John Burgoyne.

The Battle of Saratoga was a key turning point in the Revolutionary War, since it persuaded France to enter the war on the side of the Americans. It is possible that America would not have won the war without French support. At the very least, the war would have dragged on for many more years.

Obtaining the support of France was part of American strategy, though. This was one reason for Washington’s defensive posture early in the war. The Americans realized that Britain and France were ancient enemies, and that France was eager to avenge its defeat in the Seven Years War.

At the same time, the French did not want to support a hopeless rebellion. Washington realized that France would be more likely to enter the conflict as the war dragged on, so he sought to avoid early crushing defeats.

He also knew that if France entered the war, the British would be likely to focus less on America and more on French colonial possessions, such as the French West Indies.

Once France entered the war on the side of the Americans, the two sides were relatively equal in strength. At this point, the Americans adopted a more aggressive military strategy. By 1781, the Americans (along with French troops) were able to march to Yorktown and confront British troops head-on.

The Battle of Yorktown clinched America’s victory in the Revolutionary War. In the final analysis, though, American success was based more on Washington’s strategic adaptability than on any particular battle. Washington avoided overconfidence early in the war when things looked bleak, and became more aggressive once the odds were on his side.

Brown, R. (2000). Major Problems in the Era of the American Revolution, 1760-1791 . Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Middlekauff, R. (1982). The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763-1789 . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, March 22). American Revolutionary War: Causes and Outcomes. https://ivypanda.com/essays/american-revolutionary-war/

"American Revolutionary War: Causes and Outcomes." IvyPanda , 22 Mar. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/american-revolutionary-war/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'American Revolutionary War: Causes and Outcomes'. 22 March.

IvyPanda . 2019. "American Revolutionary War: Causes and Outcomes." March 22, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/american-revolutionary-war/.

1. IvyPanda . "American Revolutionary War: Causes and Outcomes." March 22, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/american-revolutionary-war/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "American Revolutionary War: Causes and Outcomes." March 22, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/american-revolutionary-war/.

• The American Revolution and Its Leading Causes
• French and Indian War in British Colonies' History
• History: From Colonies to States
• Conference: History Before 1877
• Liberties of New Englishmen
• History of the Independence Day
• Samuel Adams: Radical Puritan
• Postage Stamp Design in the U.S.
• The Stamp Act Resolutions and Declaratory Act
• Colonists’ Disagreements with Britain
• Road to Revolution
• The American Revolution and Its Effects
• Causes of Revolutionary War in America
• Battle of Kings Mountain: Causes and Effects
• History of the Conflict Between Britain and the Colonized Nations

MA in American History : Apply now and enroll in graduate courses with top historians this summer!

• AP US History Study Guide
• History U: Courses for High School Students
• History School: Summer Enrichment
• Lesson Plans
• Classroom Resources
• Spotlights on Primary Sources
• Professional Development (Academic Year)
• Professional Development (Summer)
• Book Breaks
• Inside the Vault
• Self-Paced Courses
• Browse All Resources
• Search by Issue
• Search by Essay
• Become a Member (Free)
• Monthly Offer (Free for Members)
• Program Information
• Scholarships and Financial Aid
• Applying and Enrolling
• Eligibility (In-Person)
• EduHam Online
• Hamilton Cast Read Alongs
• Official Website
• Press Coverage
• Veterans Legacy Program
• The Declaration at 250
• Black Lives in the Founding Era
• Celebrating American Historical Holidays
• Browse All Programs
• Donate Items to the Collection
• Search Our Catalog
• Research Guides
• Rights and Reproductions
• See Our Documents on Display
• Bring an Exhibition to Your Organization
• Interactive Exhibitions Online
• About the Transcription Program
• Civil War Letters
• Founding Era Newspapers
• College Fellowships in American History
• Scholarly Fellowship Program
• Richard Gilder History Prize
• David McCullough Essay Prize
• Affiliate School Scholarships
• Nominate a Teacher
• Eligibility
• State Winners
• National Winners
• Gilder Lehrman Lincoln Prize
• Gilder Lehrman Military History Prize
• George Washington Prize
• Frederick Douglass Book Prize
• Our Mission and History
• Annual Report
• Contact Information
• Student Advisory Council
• Teacher Advisory Council
• Board of Trustees
• Remembering Richard Gilder
• President's Council
• Scholarly Advisory Board
• Internships
• Our Partners
• Press Releases

History Resources

What caused the American Revolution?

By pauline maier.

Stay up to date, and subscribe to our quarterly newsletter.

Learn how the Institute impacts history education through our work guiding teachers, energizing students, and supporting research.

What to know about the crisis of violence, politics and hunger engulfing Haiti

A long-simmering crisis over Haiti’s ability to govern itself, particularly after a series of natural disasters and an increasingly dire humanitarian emergency, has come to a head in the Caribbean nation, as its de facto president remains stranded in Puerto Rico and its people starve and live in fear of rampant violence. 

The chaos engulfing the country has been bubbling for more than a year, only for it to spill over on the global stage on Monday night, as Haiti’s unpopular prime minister, Ariel Henry, agreed to resign once a transitional government is brokered by other Caribbean nations and parties, including the U.S.

But the very idea of a transitional government brokered not by Haitians but by outsiders is one of the main reasons Haiti, a nation of 11 million, is on the brink, according to humanitarian workers and residents who have called for Haitian-led solutions. 

“What we’re seeing in Haiti has been building since the 2010 earthquake,” said Greg Beckett, an associate professor of anthropology at Western University in Canada. 

What is happening in Haiti and why?

In the power vacuum that followed the assassination of democratically elected President Jovenel Moïse in 2021, Henry, who was prime minister under Moïse, assumed power, with the support of several nations, including the U.S. 

When Haiti failed to hold elections multiple times — Henry said it was due to logistical problems or violence — protests rang out against him. By the time Henry announced last year that elections would be postponed again, to 2025, armed groups that were already active in Port-au-Prince, the capital, dialed up the violence.

Even before Moïse’s assassination, these militias and armed groups existed alongside politicians who used them to do their bidding, including everything from intimidating the opposition to collecting votes . With the dwindling of the country’s elected officials, though, many of these rebel forces have engaged in excessively violent acts, and have taken control of at least 80% of the capital, according to a United Nations estimate. 

Those groups, which include paramilitary and former police officers who pose as community leaders, have been responsible for the increase in killings, kidnappings and rapes since Moïse’s death, according to the Uppsala Conflict Data Program at Uppsala University in Sweden. According to a report from the U.N . released in January, more than 8,400 people were killed, injured or kidnapped in 2023, an increase of 122% increase from 2022.

“January and February have been the most violent months in the recent crisis, with thousands of people killed, or injured, or raped,” Beckett said.

Armed groups who had been calling for Henry’s resignation have already attacked airports, police stations, sea ports, the Central Bank and the country’s national soccer stadium. The situation reached critical mass earlier this month when the country’s two main prisons were raided , leading to the escape of about 4,000 prisoners. The beleaguered government called a 72-hour state of emergency, including a night-time curfew — but its authority had evaporated by then.

Aside from human-made catastrophes, Haiti still has not fully recovered from the devastating earthquake in 2010 that killed about 220,000 people and left 1.5 million homeless, many of them living in poorly built and exposed housing. More earthquakes, hurricanes and floods have followed, exacerbating efforts to rebuild infrastructure and a sense of national unity.

Since the earthquake, “there have been groups in Haiti trying to control that reconstruction process and the funding, the billions of dollars coming into the country to rebuild it,” said Beckett, who specializes in the Caribbean, particularly Haiti. 

Beckett said that control initially came from politicians and subsequently from armed groups supported by those politicians. Political “parties that controlled the government used the government for corruption to steal that money. We’re seeing the fallout from that.”

Many armed groups have formed in recent years claiming to be community groups carrying out essential work in underprivileged neighborhoods, but they have instead been accused of violence, even murder . One of the two main groups, G-9, is led by a former elite police officer, Jimmy Chérizier — also known as “Barbecue” — who has become the public face of the unrest and claimed credit for various attacks on public institutions. He has openly called for Henry to step down and called his campaign an “armed revolution.”

But caught in the crossfire are the residents of Haiti. In just one week, 15,000 people have been displaced from Port-au-Prince, according to a U.N. estimate. But people have been trying to flee the capital for well over a year, with one woman telling NBC News that she is currently hiding in a church with her three children and another family with eight children. The U.N. said about 160,000 people have left Port-au-Prince because of the swell of violence in the last several months. 

Deep poverty and famine are also a serious danger. Gangs have cut off access to the country’s largest port, Autorité Portuaire Nationale, and food could soon become scarce.

Haiti's uncertain future

A new transitional government may dismay the Haitians and their supporters who call for Haitian-led solutions to the crisis. 

But the creation of such a government would come after years of democratic disruption and the crumbling of Haiti’s political leadership. The country hasn’t held an election in eight years. 

Haitian advocates and scholars like Jemima Pierre, a professor at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, say foreign intervention, including from the U.S., is partially to blame for Haiti’s turmoil. The U.S. has routinely sent thousands of troops to Haiti , intervened in its government and supported unpopular leaders like Henry.

“What you have over the last 20 years is the consistent dismantling of the Haitian state,” Pierre said. “What intervention means for Haiti, what it has always meant, is death and destruction.”

In fact, the country’s situation was so dire that Henry was forced to travel abroad in the hope of securing a U.N. peacekeeping deal. He went to Kenya, which agreed to send 1,000 troops to coordinate an East African and U.N.-backed alliance to help restore order in Haiti, but the plan is now on hold . Kenya agreed last October to send a U.N.-sanctioned security force to Haiti, but Kenya’s courts decided it was unconstitutional. The result has been Haiti fending for itself. 

“A force like Kenya, they don’t speak Kreyòl, they don’t speak French,” Pierre said. “The Kenyan police are known for human rights abuses . So what does it tell us as Haitians that the only thing that you see that we deserve are not schools, not reparations for the cholera the U.N. brought , but more military with the mandate to use all kinds of force on our population? That is unacceptable.”  

Henry was forced to announce his planned resignation from Puerto Rico, as threats of violence — and armed groups taking over the airports — have prevented him from returning to his country.  

Now that Henry is to stand down, it is far from clear what the armed groups will do or demand next, aside from the right to govern. 

“It’s the Haitian people who know what they’re going through. It’s the Haitian people who are going to take destiny into their own hands. Haitian people will choose who will govern them,” Chérizier said recently, according to The Associated Press .

Haitians and their supporters have put forth their own solutions over the years, holding that foreign intervention routinely ignores the voices and desires of Haitians. 

In 2021, both Haitian and non-Haitian church leaders, women’s rights groups, lawyers, humanitarian workers, the Voodoo Sector and more created the Commission to Search for a Haitian Solution to the Crisis . The commission has proposed the “ Montana Accord ,” outlining a two-year interim government with oversight committees tasked with restoring order, eradicating corruption and establishing fair elections. 

For more from NBC BLK, sign up for our weekly newsletter .

CORRECTION (March 15, 2024, 9:58 a.m. ET): An earlier version of this article misstated which university Jemima Pierre is affiliated with. She is a professor at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, not the University of California, Los Angeles, (or Columbia University, as an earlier correction misstated).

Patrick Smith is a London-based editor and reporter for NBC News Digital.

Char Adams is a reporter for NBC BLK who writes about race.